Yesterday | Musical with Beatles songs | 28th June, 2019 | Directed by Danny Boyle, written by Richard Curtis

[Avatree]

It's had nationwide screenings here today, audience reactions seem very positive.

[movies!movies!]

 

[The Futurist]

Imagine a world without Slayer ...

[JimiQ]

15 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

Imagine a world without Slayer ...

I would love to see sequel to this about Nirvana

[John Harris]

Saw "Yesterday" last night, enjoyed it quite a bit. As a Beatles fan, I loved the barrage of re-done tunes by the Fab Four. Not sure how general audiences will react, though. It's a little quirky but the romance is a bit too by-the-numbers.  Patel is an engaging and sympathetic lead. Lily James is adorable. Ed Sheeran has a bigger role than I expected, and didn't annoy me nearly as much as he normally does. I love Kate McKinnon on SNL but she walks a fine line between laugh-out-loud funny and annoyingly grating here.

 

It's a perfectly pleasant rom/com musical/fantasy for a hot summer day/night at the movies. The music puts it a notch above the average such film for me.

[JB33]

I don't know how interested I am in this film but I'm a huge Beatles film, so why not?

[The Futurist]

Lily James is adorable in this.

Who knew ?

[dxmatrixdt]

On 6/22/2019 at 9:30 PM, JimiQ said:

I would love to see sequel to this about Nirvana

Edited June 27, 2019 by Slave Animal Rights

[movies!movies!]

$26 million budget

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=untitleddannyboyle.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2019 by movies!movies!

[AJG]

This movie "lost' $88m

 

https://deadline.com/2020/05/yesterday-net-profit-statement-loss-universal-beatles-danny-boyle-1202925277/

 

The Universal/Working Title film, which grossed over $153.7M worldwide, did well enough to make it onto a list of Deadline’s 2019 outliers, smaller films with outsized profits, in our recent movie revenue tournament, estimated to earn $45M in net profit. It’s a different story, however, when it comes to collecting net points on films like these.

 

Deadline was slipped a net profit participant sheet on Yesterday, and according to that document, the Beatles-themed romance movie is still in the red by as much as $88 million.

[Barnack]

1 hour ago, AJG said:

This movie "lost' $88m

 

https://deadline.com/2020/05/yesterday-net-profit-statement-loss-universal-beatles-danny-boyle-1202925277/

 

The Universal/Working Title film, which grossed over $153.7M worldwide, did well enough to make it onto a list of Deadline’s 2019 outliers, smaller films with outsized profits, in our recent movie revenue tournament, estimated to earn $45M in net profit. It’s a different story, however, when it comes to collecting net points on films like these.

 

Deadline was slipped a net profit participant sheet on Yesterday, and according to that document, the Beatles-themed romance movie is still in the red by as much as $88 million.

This is quite on the sensationalist side, like it is said this is for the accounting period finishing 12/31/2019 before most of the movie revenues come in (global tv), the TV line the biggest one is still at 0 and the home entertainment side was not completely over (but i imagine it tend to be frontloaded, but considering the movie release ended in september-October it was yet to be rolled out everywhere). And has was see the home enternaiment revenues on that sheet are not the gross they have an * that say calculated at a royalty pursuant to contractual agreement (could be 10%, 20%, 30% of them in the past 20% was quite common but I imagine it could be more moving now), i.e. that sheet is not talking about if the movie made a profit or not to anyone and sadly cannot be use to have a good idea of post theatrical revenues.

 

It is nice to have a recent leak, to get some idea of up to date deadline estimate close

 

They had $65 in WW P&A, this seem to show closer to $80m (75.4 in ads alone)

Interest 4M, 4.6M, very similar, like in the past they seem in the general ballpark with budget/participation bonus being the most off.

Not sure where there the talk of 26M come from ? Does not seem to have any source about it on wikipedia (simply point on mojo), the rights for the music alone was above $10M and I do not think you can get tax credit for that.

 

Deadline didn't seem to have a admin fee (here 15% of the budget or something like that), but it could be in the off-the-tops affair.

 

 

Edited May 5, 2020 by Barnack

[Ryan Reynolds]

 

[filmlover]

14 minutes ago, Ryan Reynolds said:

 

Certainly these people know they're going to be laughed out of court, right? What a waste of time and money lmao.

[grim22]

18 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Certainly these people know they're going to be laughed out of court, right? What a waste of time and money lmao.

Not necessarily. They may be able to get ticket price refunded with interest. Remember the Drive lady who sued because the trailer misrepresented the movie, the Jack Reacher guy who sued because of an explosion in the trailer which wasn't in the movie which he said led to him buying his ticket, or the guy who sued Predators because the trailer showed way more Predators than were there in the movie.

 

All of them got their ticket price back from the studio with interest tacked on. These guys may end up with 50$ of the 5 million they want.

[CoolioD1]

They have a case!

 

edit: somehow i'm the top poster in this topic. never seen this film. perhaps because i already knew ana de armas had been cut.

Edited January 22, 2022 by CoolioD1

[Eric Duncan]

9 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

They have a case!

 

edit: somehow i'm the top poster in this topic. never seen this film. perhaps because i already knew ana de armas had been cut.

You're not missing anything. Yet another film that wastes Lily James' talents.

[filmlover]

5 hours ago, grim22 said:

Not necessarily. They may be able to get ticket price refunded with interest. Remember the Drive lady who sued because the trailer misrepresented the movie, the Jack Reacher guy who sued because of an explosion in the trailer which wasn't in the movie which he said led to him buying his ticket, or the guy who sued Predators because the trailer showed way more Predators than were there in the movie.

 

All of them got their ticket price back from the studio with interest tacked on. These guys may end up with 50$ of the 5 million they want.

I forgot all about the woman who sued the studio behind Drive because she thought she was getting a Fast & the Furious movie from the trailer lol. That case was tossed btw. From Variety's article about this:

 

Quote

 

The suit bears a resemblance to a complaint involving the film “Drive” that was filed in Michigan in 2011. In that case, the plaintiff alleged that the trailer made it appear that the film would be a “high speed action driving film,” and she was not prepared for the film’s slow-paced interpersonal drama punctuated with graphic violence.

 

An appeals court dismissed that case on several grounds, including that the trailer was not deceptive.

 

“A review of the trailer demonstrates that it is not particularly inconsistent with the content of the film,” the Michigan court held. “Every scene displayed in the preview also appeared in the film.”

 

The defendants in that case also argued that the film and the trailer were protected by the First Amendment.

 

 

Back to this, they might have had a case if they had seen it while it was a brand new movie in theaters. But this was apparently a $3.99 rental at an undisclosed point after it left theaters years ago, so that just makes this even more baseless since these "fans" could've easily done their research. The studio also even released her deleted footage on the DVD that can easily be found on YouTube. I guess it's more fun to waste our court system's valuable time than to accept that they lost a couple of dollars.

 

 

[CoolioD1]

imagine if this movie grossed the $73m domestic it made in 2019 today. everyone would be doing backflips. it would be the most mindblowing run of the year.  it would probably win best picture.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

1 hour ago, CoolioD1 said:

imagine if this movie grossed the $73m domestic it made in 2019 today. everyone would be doing backflips. it would be the most mindblowing run of the year.  it would probably win best picture.

Now, it would be lucky to make $30 million. A bunch of people would insist that there was never really a theatrical market for a Yesterday, it's been decades since movies like this really sold any tickets, it wouldn't have done any before, etc. And to think, $73 million was seen as a "meh" result back then.

 

On Wikipedia, it does list the movie in Ana's filmography but says the scenes were deleted. IMDb also lists Yesterday for her, but just says she's uncredited, which is a lot more vague. Either way, the lawsuit seems flimsy and not worth the money they'll end up getting, unless these guys are just using LegalZoom or some legal insurance service they're already paying for.

Edited January 22, 2022 by BoxOfficeFangrl

[dudalb]

Lots of movies have scenes in the trailer which don't  make the final cut.

I don't think the lawsuit will get very far.

Surprised they don't put the scenes back in; Ana was not really a star when this was released; now she is. The breakthrough film for her was "Knives Out".

This whole kurfufled reminds me of of the oldest gimmicks in marketing movies for home viewing: Take a movie where a currently hot star had a small role at the start o their career, and now give them star billing in marketing like they have a major role.